If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

See, this is where the thread is veering a bit off from what I thought was originally being discussed in the other thread that got move here. I am interested in an Old School marker game where the older the better marker is brought out and encouraged. Giving out awards for rarest makers, oldest marker etc. If you had enough guys getting together to have a squad of Mag guys going against a squad of Cocker guys and such. I really could care less about mech, electro or whatever, I would like to just see a game with some really old cool markers on the field. I recently went to a CPPL gathering at a localish field and was actually surprised at some of the markers brought out. At one point, there was me with my Mag, another guy with a Palmers, 2-3 guys with cockers and some dude with an old Pro Carbine. Afterwards, we all were in the staging area admiring each others markers and such. It was cool.

sounds like you just need a group of players that are fun to play with, more then you need a classic marker rule. on any given rec day around here there is everything from SC pumps to the newest and fastest.

Okay I am not siding with either sides of any of this ROF loopholes thing (although Qloaders are not difficult and unfair!!) but what about this. You alert everyone ahead of time that it is CO2 only. Bam. Some of you may not like it but if you look at it, it would be the easiest and simplest way to keep down ROF and amount of paint in the air. And this wouldn't be difficult because I hope that most of us still have our old CO2 valves lying around somewhere. and if not they are very cheap. When using CO2 there is no walking the trigger, there is no RT effect and most especially there is some shoot-down depending on whether you changed up the trigger pull to be insanely light on a CO2 valve.

This would be great in my point of view as not everyone is being forced to use a rental marker and they still get to keep their custom gear. I will never use a rental as whenever I walk around with one I feel exposed and out in the open, I feel uncomfortable for some reason.

Benifits
-No high ROF
-Performance playing field is largely evened out
-Does not ban any equipment except for HPA tanks.

Downsides
-No high ROF
-You cant run a slaughterhouse

Just thought to express my point of view although I am nearly the heavy gunner you described. I carry almost a case of paint on me (1600 shots) on field with a 90/45 1100 psi output. But I am not rolling in $$$. I am able to easily control my ROF and I dont use it often. I never buy more than a case a day (exceptions on big games) and my technological abilities do not come without a downside. My vest is not exactly lightweight as I carry 15 Qpods in it (using Q is heavier if you use a lot of them) and quite a few more 140 pods for my friends as I have been dubbed the human pack mule I carry all of this because I enjoy staying out in the field as long as possible and not having to worry about the efficiency of my equipment holding me back. Not to spray and pray on rental users.

Is it possible to run a game with only markers that were in production pre-2000 (or pick a year)? If your goal is to have nostalgic markers why try to accomplish that through a rule that does not directly address it?

Okay I am not siding with either sides of any of this ROF loopholes thing (although Qloaders are not difficult and unfair!!) but what about this. You alert everyone ahead of time that it is CO2 only. Bam. Some of you may not like it but if you look at it, it would be the easiest and simplest way to keep down ROF and amount of paint in the air. And this wouldn't be difficult because I hope that most of us still have our old CO2 valves lying around somewhere. and if not they are very cheap. When using CO2 there is no walking the trigger, there is no RT effect and most especially there is some shoot-down depending on whether you changed up the trigger pull to be insanely light on a CO2 valve.

This would be great in my point of view as not everyone is being forced to use a rental marker and they still get to keep their custom gear. I will never use a rental as whenever I walk around with one I feel exposed and out in the open, I feel uncomfortable for some reason.

Benifits
-No high ROF
-Performance playing field is largely evened out
-Does not ban any equipment except for HPA tanks.

Downsides
-No high ROF
-You cant run a slaughterhouse

Just thought to express my point of view although I am nearly the heavy gunner you described. I carry almost a case of paint on me (1600 shots) on field with a 90/45 1100 psi output. But I am not rolling in $$$. I am able to easily control my ROF and I dont use it often. I never buy more than a case a day (exceptions on big games) and my technological abilities do not come without a downside. My vest is not exactly lightweight as I carry 15 Qpods in it (using Q is heavier if you use a lot of them) and quite a few more 140 pods for my friends as I have been dubbed the human pack mule I carry all of this because I enjoy staying out in the field as long as possible and not having to worry about the efficiency of my equipment holding me back. Not to spray and pray on rental users.

Not X-valves though. And I was pretty sure that would cause damage to your marker unless if it is made mainly for CO2 or else the electronics and operation of it would get damaged. I am pretty sure but would not mind if corrected.

Until I find out otherwise I would say feel free to use CO2 and ruin your high end electro.

So a guy comes to the field with a Qloaded pneumag. Then you're going to say "okay, no pneumatic triggers" or "okay, no spring-loaded hoppers".

No Iím not. Go ahead and bring it.

Originally Posted by Justus

Why make rules for a desired goal with the knowledge that there are loopholes that people can and will exploit? Just say that the game will have a limited ROF and be done with it.

Of course if you've now changed your tune, and instead are wanting to make these rules to encourage mechanical innovation, then I'll point out that it's not necessary to set some people up for failure in an actual game. Just post a contest to see it happen. That way the people who use a shake & bake with a blowback Tippmann don't get pasted and leave feeling like they got cheated. See below...

And I think it will limit the ROF. Tune hasnít changed. Without RT (and that was a long a standing rule, back when there literally was nothing but mech available in the first place), I believe it works.

It takes a certain amount of work to get through that ďloopholeĒ if you want to call it that. And if they go through that, I would actually be OK with it. They have to expend non-negligible effort to get there and to actually make it work, as opposed to just talking about it in the forums or making ďshooting videosĒ. I mean, seriously, how many Q-Loaded pneumags are there running around out in the wild?

Also I think you should let the Tippmann players speak for themselves. Are you one of them?

Originally Posted by Justus

So you're okay with that remaining 10% having a huge, game-changing advantage? That's not a level playing field, that's a setup for a slaughter.

Funny, you just described normal recball.

You still play recball, right? Even at the risk of someone bringing an electro or an excessively bouncing RT?

Oh, wait, youíre one of the guys that brings those kinds of guns to recball...

Hrm.

Originally Posted by Justus

Anyone can say "if you think it's dumb then don't play", but how far do you take it? If people are informed ahead of time to expect that a certain number of people on the field will have a huge firepower advantage due to their ability to legally exploit the rules, you can rest assured that the interest level will drop dramatically.

You mean like normal recball?

I think that this thread is evidence that it doesnít need to be taken any further. The rules as I would envision them are working as intended.

Originally Posted by Justus

This would actually work. Instead of making vague limitations on equipment that fail assure an even playing field... just issue standardized equipment in the first place.

And thatís fine too. If you want to have an all standardized gun game, thatís fine. Knock yourself out. Weíve actually talked about doing that at our field as well. In fact I played with a Tippmann with a shake and bake in just normal open rec play earlier this year (field owner was curious to see how I would play without my normal marker). Then I did it again with a BT-4 with Prophecy (and I think I would have been better off with a shake and bake on that one) against a bunch of electros because a friend and I had kind of a debate going.

I didnít get ďpastedĒ or feel cheated, even against electros on the airball field. I took 1 hit to the hopper because Iím not used to hoppers. I forgot to turn on the hopper another game (because Iím not used to hoppers), and then the BT-4 finally just up and died on one game. No pasting or cheating, I just hated that gun. I didn't hate the fact that the others were using electros.

Originally Posted by Justus

But nobody who is proposing the "mech only" rules as a way to limit the ROF has even addressed my point: Why not just have a simple rule limiting ROF if that's the actual goal? If 12.5 bps PSP ramping is too much, make the limit 8 bps semi-only. Any other set of rules that is proposed to achieve that goal, without actually setting the ROF limit, just leads to exploitation based upon the known ambiguity.

I canít tell you to not have a simple rule like that because itís perfectly fine. You can have that rule if you want. Iím not saying you canít. If you want your own game with your own rules, feel free to do so. Iíd be happy to play that game too.

Originally Posted by Justus

If your goal is ______________________________ why try to accomplish that through a rule that does not directly address it?

This oneís easy.

The goal is to see how well people play without batteries or RT triggers. Therefore, the rule is to not allow batteries or RT triggers.

Howís that?

Look, if you donít get it, thatís fine, donít worry about it. You donít have to play. Play an electro/ROF/paint limited game if you like. I think some of the old schoolers get it, and some of the Rampy McReactivetriggersteinovichs wonít and will stay away. No harm, no foul.

I think the biggest limiting factor for turnout isnít the fear of a Q-Loaded Rainbow Laser Shooting Mech Pneumag Unicorn, itís what athomas mentioned -- there are a lot of players that indeed sink everything into their electros and just donít have enough scratch to find a good mech that they would actually like. Sure, they could pick up a cheap crappy mech, but between playing with a crappy mech and not playing at all, theyíd probably sooner not play at all, especially if normal play is available to them anyways. I know quite a few players like this. And I canít blame them.

Not X-valves though. And I was pretty sure that would cause damage to your marker unless if it is made mainly for CO2 or else the electronics and operation of it would get damaged. I am pretty sure but would not mind if corrected.

Until I find out otherwise I would say feel free to use CO2 and ruin your high end electro.

you were already corrected in the post you were responding to. you can, if you want to, run co2 through most if not all current high end guns, with less then 100 bucks in parts, if not bone stock already.

you were already corrected in the post you were responding to. you can, if you want to, run co2 through most if not all current high end guns, with less then 100 bucks in parts, if not bone stock already.

Well nevermind then. Dang I thought I had a good idea If I was right then it would have been perfect and easy to enforce. Worth a shot. I gotta keep up with electro's

It takes a certain amount of work to get through that ďloopholeĒ if you want to call it that. And if they go through that, I would actually be OK with it. They have to expend non-negligible effort to get there and to actually make it work, as opposed to just talking about it in the forums or making ďshooting videosĒ. I mean, seriously, how many Q-Loaded pneumags are there running around out in the wild?

It started off as simply "mech only", with no batteries even for the hopper. When I pointed out that a qloaded X-valve Mag would still have an absurdly high rate of fire (and even posted a video to prove it), you changed the rules to include "no excessively reactive trigger". I've got a pneumag in the works, just need the time and cash to put together the remaining parts. They're really not as uncommon as you make them out to be. Sure, qloaders are uncommon right now, but that's because people have always been free to use battery-powered hoppers that are much easier to set up and use. But my point is that if you create a game whereby a certain set of equipment has the advantage, then people will build it as it becomes their priority. As that happens, I can foresee another rule revision to exclude spring loaded or pneumatic hoppers and triggers. Otherwise, the rules really have no purpose if the goal is to limit ROF.

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

And I think it will limit the ROF. Tune hasnít changed. Without RT (and that was a long a standing rule, back when there literally was nothing but mech available in the first place), I believe it works.
...
This oneís easy.
The goal is to see how well people play without batteries or RT triggers. Therefore, the rule is to not allow batteries or RT triggers.
Howís that?

So the goal did change. First it was mech only to limit ROF. Now it's to simply play without batteries or RT triggers.

You want to have a game where the only purpose is to play without batteries and RT triggers, that's fine. I'm just pointing out the pitfalls and asking the question, "with xyz setup, what's actually changed about the gameplay?" If nothing... then what's the point of telling someone else what they can or can't play with?

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

Also I think you should let the Tippmann players speak for themselves. Are you one of them?

I run a field where the rentals are shake & bake Alpha Blacks, and I ran an A5 marker before I got into Mags. I still have a 98 Custom in my gearbag as a backup/loaner, and some games I'll roll out with nothing but my TPX. So, yeah, I kinda am one of them.

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

Funny, you just described normal recball.
You still play recball, right? Even at the risk of someone bringing an electro or an excessively bouncing RT?
Oh, wait, youíre one of the guys that brings those kinds of guns to recball...
Hrm.

Yeah, I play recball. Try to at least monthly. There's usually a pretty good mix of modern electros, RT's and blowbacks. Some people use pumps, others use ramping - and it's all by choice, not by any certain set of rules. If I use my ETac rather than my pump or TPX, I have it set at 10 to 12 bps limit, semi auto, and I honestly don't shoot any faster than the blowbacks - primarily because I've never been good at walking the trigger and refuse to use ramping. Because I run a field it's my first priority to make sure the walk-ons have fun and are excited about returning to play again. If you're trying to insinuate that I shoot ropes on people with rental markers simply because I have the possibility of a ROF advantage, think again.

And no, when I warned about the huge playing-field gap that will result from your proposed rules, I wasn't describing anything remotely like recball, which has players at both extremes and also dispersed throughout the middle of the ROF spectrum because they all have the ability to choose what equipment setups they want to use.

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

I think the biggest limiting factor for turnout isnít the fear of a Q-Loaded Rainbow Laser Shooting Mech Pneumag Unicorn, itís what athomas mentioned -- there are a lot of players that indeed sink everything into their electros and just donít have enough scratch to find a good mech that they would actually like. Sure, they could pick up a cheap crappy mech, but between playing with a crappy mech and not playing at all, theyíd probably sooner not play at all, especially if normal play is available to them anyways. I know quite a few players like this. And I canít blame them.

Yeah, of course this is a good point, aside from the implication that a pneumag is like a unicorn. I mean, c'mon, you can buy a bolt-on sleeper frame pretty easily if you just look in the BST from time to time. And you don't even need a pneumag. A finely tuned ULT is darn near walkable by itself. But, I digress. What athomas said ties right in with my point - if the purpose is to limit the ROF, then just allow people to limit their ROF and use their desired equipment. You'll get your gameplay change without prohibiting people from using the equipment that they prefer and have invested in.

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

I canít tell you to not have a simple rule like that because itís perfectly fine. You can have that rule if you want. Iím not saying you canít. If you want your own game with your own rules, feel free to do so. Iíd be happy to play that game too.

I don't "want my own game", I'm simply trying to further the discussion on some possible alternate game formats and what I believe will work, and what I believe will ultimately not do enough to make any noticeable difference.

Not X-valves though. And I was pretty sure that would cause damage to your marker unless if it is made mainly for CO2 or else the electronics and operation of it would get damaged. I am pretty sure but would not mind if corrected.

Until I find out otherwise I would say feel free to use CO2 and ruin your high end electro.

AKA, IIRC, said that an anti-siphon CO2 tank attached to a Palmers stabilizer was just acceptable to use in a Viking. This is why you have to actually write rules to accomplish what you mean to accomplish because otherwise someone will "side step" what you were trying to do with a creative solution. I would guess the electro-Blazer would have no issue

For the record the old PSP and NPPL rules required that loaders have some gravity portion in them - the warp was questionable if it met the rules requirements. For some reason the HALO was given a pass.

Last edited by Lohman446; 11-09-2012 at 11:21 AM.

"Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better. Its not" - Dr Suess

It started off as simply "mech only", with no batteries even for the hopper. When I pointed out that a qloaded X-valve Mag would still have an absurdly high rate of fire (and even posted a video to prove it), you changed the rules to include "no excessively reactive trigger". I've got a pneumag in the works, just need the time and cash to put together the remaining parts. They're really not as uncommon as you make them out to be. Sure, qloaders are uncommon right now, but that's because people have always been free to use battery-powered hoppers that are much easier to set up and use. But my point is that if you create a game whereby a certain set of equipment has the advantage, then people will build it as it becomes their priority. As that happens, I can foresee another rule revision to exclude spring loaded or pneumatic hoppers and triggers. Otherwise, the rules really have no purpose if the goal is to limit ROF.

Thatís my point. The number of Q-Loaded pneumags out running in the wild, as far as I can tell, is currently: 0.5. The half of one that you havenít even finished yet. It will take some amount of tinkering and tweaking, and Iím betting when you field that thing, it wonít make that much a difference because there is a certain amount of *operator skill* thatís still necessary to make it work out in-game.

If I were running the game, Iíd be all for you bringing that gun.

Once youíve finished it.

Originally Posted by Justus

So the goal did change. First it was mech only to limit ROF. Now it's to simply play without batteries or RT triggers.

Yes, this ďstarted off as mech onlyĒ. Mech only means without batteries. Goal didnít change. Goal started out as: mech only, and it ended up as: mech only. There are some effects that Iíve tried to outline, but theyíre not sinking in so itís simplest to say: mech only means no batteries. How I am perceived as vacillating, I have no idea. Mech only. Real simple.

The non-bouncing RT rule has been in place for a long, long time. I find it shameful that people actually have to be reminded of it. The old timers around here remember it. Shameful.

Originally Posted by Justus

You want to have a game where the only purpose is to play without batteries and RT triggers, that's fine. I'm just pointing out the pitfalls and asking the question, "with xyz setup, what's actually changed about the gameplay?" If nothing... then what's the point of telling someone else what they can or can't play with?

And thatís part of the problem. You perceive zero change in gameplay. And I think that is simply a reflection of the way you play. And itís not something someone else will be able to explain to you.

Originally Posted by Justus

I run a field where the rentals are shake & bake Alpha Blacks, and I ran an A5 marker before I got into Mags. I still have a 98 Custom in my gearbag as a backup/loaner, and some games I'll roll out with nothing but my TPX. So, yeah, I kinda am one of them.

Great, excellent. So as one of these operators, do you personally feel pasted/cheated when you step out into a game where someone else has an overwhelming advantage? If not, why would you think someone else would feel the same way?

Originally Posted by Justus

If I use my ETac rather than my pump or TPX, I have it set at 10 to 12 bps limit, semi auto, and I honestly don't shoot any faster than the blowbacks - primarily because I've never been good at walking the trigger

Thereís that *operator skill* component I keep referring to. If you canít walk an electro, good luck successfully walking a pneu. Please, bring forth the Q-Loaded pneumag for all to witness, in-game.

Once youíve finished it.

Originally Posted by Justus

Because I run a field it's my first priority to make sure the walk-ons have fun and are excited about returning to play again. If you're trying to insinuate that I shoot ropes on people with rental markers simply because I have the possibility of a ROF advantage, think again.

And if you wouldnít do it (despite video evidence), why would you assume someone else would?

I mean, in the context where bunch of guys are going, ďHey, letís all switch to mech and play a few gamesĒ, whipping out a video of you hunkered in the back of what appears to be a rec game ripping a string into a bunch of nothing isnít exactly a highlight. Thereís just something very Ö I donít even know what the right word for this is.

If I had a video of myself doing that, I would quietly bury it somewhere where nobody would ever find it.

Originally Posted by Justus

And no, when I warned about the huge playing-field gap that will result from your proposed rules, I wasn't describing anything remotely like recball, which has players at both extremes and also dispersed throughout the middle of the ROF spectrum because they all have the ability to choose what equipment setups they want to use.

So the huge gap in a mech-only game would be larger than the huge gap in a recball game where everything else is allowed.

Uhh....

Originally Posted by Justus

Yeah, of course this is a good point, aside from the implication that a pneumag is like a unicorn. I mean, c'mon, you can buy a bolt-on sleeper frame pretty easily if you just look in the BST from time to time. And you don't even need a pneumag. A finely tuned ULT is darn near walkable by itself.

You are absolutely right! You sure can! Show us how damn near overpowering a damn near walkable ULT is, in game.

Once youíve finished it.

Originally Posted by Justus

I don't "want my own game", I'm simply trying to further the discussion on some possible alternate game formats and what I believe will work, and what I believe will ultimately not do enough to make any noticeable difference.

Meh, the rants are getting too long and off focus. Edited this post out in an effort to stop the landslide. Do whatever you feel will work, GoatBoy, and good luck with it. I sincerely hope people will end up playing within the spirit of your proposed rules.

Yeah sure, let's do that. If you want a game that has a limited rate of fire, then just make a rule limiting the rate of fire. Anyone shooting more than X bps is cheating. It's quite simple and doesn't lead to loopholes. Sounds pretty valid to me. I haven't heard of any ways to exploit the rules to gain a legal advantage. You got anything?

How do you enforce a ROF cap on a mechanical marker? Just because player A can get it to do 15BPS does not mean player B or the ref has a chance. I think this is a major flaw in your reasoning

How do you enforce a ROF cap on a mechanical marker? Just because player A can get it to do 15BPS does not mean player B or the ref has a chance. I think this is a major flaw in your reasoning

Yeah, enforcement of the rule is an issue that would need to be hammered out. How do they enforce the ROF cap in PSP tournaments? I'd say start there, and work something out.

But the issue of enforcement isn't a major flaw in my reasoning, because it's already being done (see the aforementioned PSP tournament example). A flaw in the reasoning would have to be something that a player could legally exploit to gain an advantage.

Yeah, enforcement of the rule is an issue that would need to be hammered out. How do they enforce the ROF cap in PSP tournaments? I'd say start there, and work something out.

But the issue of enforcement isn't a major flaw in my reasoning, because it's already being done (see the aforementioned PSP tournament example). A flaw in the reasoning would have to be something that a player could legally exploit to gain an advantage.

The major difference is that legally set PSP ramping markers the ROF can be attained by virtually anyone. So a ref can readily check it. In a mech there is no software limiting it so a player may attain ROF a ref is not able to duplicate. Or a piano playing ref might disqualify every marker handed him.

The major difference is that legally set PSP ramping markers the ROF can be attained by virtually anyone. So a ref can readily check it. In a mech there is no software limiting it so a player may attain ROF a ref is not able to duplicate. Or a piano playing ref might disqualify every marker handed him.

Yeah, but I said to just make a rule limiting ROF, not make a mech-only rule. Maybe this means that mechs aren't allowed since there's no way of limiting the ROF?

Or, because there's no way of limiting the ROF on a mech, go ahead and allow it but disallow trigger bounce and also require mechs to have a certain trigger pull weight to be classified as legal. It's not a perfect rule, but probably better than eliminating all mech-only markers.

Any time the goal is to limit ROF, there's going to need to be multiple rules to achieve that and still allow the widest array of equipment choices. And this enforcement problem actually illustrates my point better, too - if the goal is to limit the ROF, then eliminating electros from participation is wholly unnecessary because it's actually easier to limit the ROF on an electro than it is a mech.

Yeah, but I said to just make a rule limiting ROF, not make a mech-only rule. Maybe this means that mechs aren't allowed since there's no way of limiting the ROF?

Or, because there's no way of limiting the ROF on a mech, go ahead and allow it but disallow trigger bounce and also require mechs to have a certain trigger pull weight to be classified as legal. It's not a perfect rule, but probably better than eliminating all mech-only markers.

Any time the goal is to limit ROF, there's going to need to be multiple rules to achieve that and still allow the widest array of equipment choices. And this enforcement problem actually illustrates my point better, too - if the goal is to limit the ROF, then eliminating electros from participation is wholly unnecessary because it's actually easier to limit the ROF on an electro than it is a mech.

Haven't you just effectively "created" the tournaments that are readily available then?

If I want to go to an electro ROF limited tournament there are a tremendous amount to pick from.

Haven't you just effectively "created" the tournaments that are readily available then?

If I want to go to an electro ROF limited tournament there are a tremendous amount to pick from.

I'm now lost to what your point was

My point was that the idea of going "mech only" as a way to really limit down the ROF is seriously flawed. A simply "mech only" rule will not work to limit the ROF. If you want to honestly limit the ROF, then it's actually much easier to do with electros.

As for the ample amounts of tournaments that are already available, I was thinking that the goal was to get the ROF down lower than 12.5 bps with ramping. Make the rule 8 bps, no ramping. Make it whatever you want. Just don't think that having a "mech only" rule will solve the problem of ROF.

I guess when you get down to it, my point was to not have a silver bullet answer; it was to point out the problem with the "mech only" proposition. I have never been a proponent of anything other than saying "that (mech only) won't work to meet the goal (lower ROF)."

-------------------------
EDIT: When looking back over the thread, here's where I think it started:

Originally Posted by Lohman446

What would mech only games do? They would be somewhere between "open pump" and "open". I doubt anyone would notice the difference in game play or format. We would play the exact same game with different equipment. Same tactics, same strategies, just different markers.

What are my thoughts on this matter? Limit paint by... *gasp* limiting paint.

My response: "Yeah, I agree"

Originally Posted by GoatBoy

I do not believe in a paint limit; if someone wants to strap 2 cases onto their back, then by all means let them. The amount of paint someone is carrying has never concerned me, only the effective ROF he can achieve. Mech-only *will* limit this.

Honestly i think this is a lot easier to solve than you all make it out to be. Eliminate ramping. electro mech makes no difference one pull one fire. I have no issue with high rates of fire as long as it is accomplished by player skill not the programing on the guns bored. And pretty much all electros have a uncapped or capped semi auto mode.

The ideal of limited ammo i feel is intriguing as well hopper ball would offer a very different style/tactics of play.

And i also understand the premis of a all mech game for pure nostalgia point. But with guns like the newly coming GOG Enmey, and Tippmans Crossover (without a batt in mech mode), or the Tippmann Phenom i think you would not see the nostalgia you looking for. A best bet would be a limit on year of manufacture.

Another game i would love to see is just a big game cocker vs mag game.

I still play pump almost every time i play regardless who i playing against and what they shooting. I get shot out more than some but i still get out get a few eliminations and have a blast.

My point was that the idea of going "mech only" as a way to really limit down the ROF is seriously flawed. A simply "mech only" rule will not work to limit the ROF. If you want to honestly limit the ROF, then it's actually much easier to do with electros.

As for the ample amounts of tournaments that are already available, I was thinking that the goal was to get the ROF down lower than 12.5 bps with ramping. Make the rule 8 bps, no ramping. Make it whatever you want. Just don't think that having a "mech only" rule will solve the problem of ROF.

I guess when you get down to it, my point was to not have a silver bullet answer; it was to point out the problem with the "mech only" proposition. I have never been a proponent of anything other than saying "that (mech only) won't work to meet the goal (lower ROF)."

I think we just got turned around somewhere in the discussion. I think if we are attempting to limit paint instituting a paint limit (per player, per team, per tournament, per game, whatever) would be a lot easier (especially to enforce) then instituting a ROF cap.

I think we just got turned around somewhere in the discussion. I think if we are attempting to limit paint instituting a paint limit (per player, per team, per tournament, per game, whatever) would be a lot easier (especially to enforce) then instituting a ROF cap.

That's very true and I agree it would be much easier. It would probably even have the total effect of toning down the overall ROF on each game, as teams have to deal with the strategy of making most of their shots count for something. Of course, that's just a nice byproduct and not necessarily a goal, which makes the enforcement issue (when it comes to ROF) go away.

What would it take to get the gameplay level changed? An average of 200 rounds per player, distributed among a team however they feel necessary? That would be like a souped-up version of hopperball.

That's very true and I agree it would be much easier. It would probably even have the total effect of toning down the overall ROF on each game, as teams have to deal with the strategy of making most of their shots count for something. Of course, that's just a nice byproduct and not necessarily a goal, which makes the enforcement issue (when it comes to ROF) go away.

What would it take to get the gameplay level changed? An average of 200 rounds per player, distributed among a team however they feel necessary? That would be like a souped-up version of hopperball.

200, 400, 600? I'm not sure. I don't think we have to go down to the point of a single hoppers worth per player (be interesting though to see teams exploit that by giving the front guys 20 rounds or something freeing up a pod for the back players).

I don't know at what number it would start to influence game play but it would be something worth toying with. When I used to play tournaments I shot very little paint compared to others but going out with less than two pods made me feel like I was going to run out at any moment (though I seldom used the second one). This was in the era of a 15BPS ROF cap. Some of my back players would carry a case or very close to it.

200, 400, 600? I'm not sure. I don't think we have to go down to the point of a single hoppers worth per player (be interesting though to see teams exploit that by giving the front guys 20 rounds or something freeing up a pod for the back players).

I don't know at what number it would start to influence game play but it would be something worth toying with. When I used to play tournaments I shot very little paint compared to others but going out with less than two pods made me feel like I was going to run out at any moment (though I seldom used the second one). This was in the era of a 15BPS ROF cap. Some of my back players would carry a case or very close to it.

I played in a 3-man benefit tourney a few weeks back, using a high-cap Rotor and carrying 4 pods. After the first game I shucked the pods and just went out with a full hopper each time. Never ran out of paint. But, I didn't sit in back holding a lane the whole time either, I pushed up and only shot when attempting to get an elimination or keep a head down for movement.

It's an interesting concept. And I'd bet it works a whole lot differently in a woodsball game (which is 95% what I play). As a matter of fact, if it were in a woodsball game I'd be tempted to just go mag-fed with my TPX and let teammates provide the suppressive fire.